aren't very many locations of that character any more, because our surface has been pretty thoroughly combed for indications of mineral lodes, but he goes out and he locates as he did in the beginning, and here's a fact that I want to call to your attention in passing; the first mineral location made in our Coeur d'Alene mining district was named the Evolution lode. I want you to bear that in mind, that in any changes of mining laws, in any changes of any of our laws relating to the public lands particularly, disturbing conditions that have been in existence for all these many, many years, that we should bear that in mind, evolution, and not revolution, and to separate the surface from the subsurface rights in mining and location of mining claims is revolutionary, not evolutionary at all. It's not correcting something; it's changing it completely and absolutely, because the man who goes out to locate a mineral claim must have the surface of that claim if he wants to carry on the kind of an operation that a prudent man would wish to undertake and invest his money in doing so.

Then there's another suggestion been made, under this multiple-use idea again, and that is the division of the surface. Some people seem to think that the miner gets too much of the surface when he locates a claim. He gets too much of it because he gets all of it. If he located any other kind of a claim on public land he'd also get all of it, but here there's something different, you say, that he should only have that much of it as necessary, necessary for the operation of that property and the development of it. Well, I don't see very many miners here, but there are some, and I wish some of them had the understanding and the knowledge and could look so far into the crystal ball to determine when you locate a mining claim how much of the surface of that mining claim you're going to require for the operation of that property. You can't see down in the ground at all; you don't know what you've got, and very often you find out you haven't got anything, but suppose it is an operation such as some of the large operations right here at the door of Spokane? Suppose it is? How in the name of common sense is any man to determine at that time, or even the Bureau of Land Management with all its knowledge and information and all its wisdom and understanding, how is it going to determine how much of that claim is necessary for carrying on the operation that might result from the opening up of this mineral property? Remember, the object is to open up that mineral property, to go down into the ground and find out what's there, first, and then take it out and then process it. on the ground, to have the necessary access to it, to have all that is necessary for buildings, for housing a camp, and all that sort of thing. Well, of course there isn't any man could do that, and there isn't any Government bureau could do that.

Then somebody else has suggested that after all, these minerals, that there should be a leasing system, and that the miner locating this ground should only have a lease upon what he might find, and that the Government should exact certain royalties, which I suppose, to be really honest about it, we might say would be just as much as the traffic would bear. I think it would be a little more, because I think there's nothing that would retard the location and development of metal mining claims. I'm not speaking of those that are more or less determinable from the surface; I'm not speaking of oil or gas leases; I'm speaking of mining leases for the man who takes the claim, spends his own money on it, money that he's able to raise for that purpose,

makes his own investment, puts in his own labor and his own effort and then expects to get back whatever in the course of time and according to the dictates of a benevolent Congress the Government is willing to let him have as a result of his efforts. That of course the miner, the metal miner, the man who has gone through all this period of discovery and exploration and operation and all the risks and all the trials and all the losses that are incident thereto, cannot possibly think of. He doesn't want to be a sharecropper.

Then there's another question that was raised, and that is the timber on claims. I know that's a ticklish subject. I know we're involved in that up in our own area, because a good deal of our Coeur d'Alene is in forest. I know the Forest Service has just one idea, as they've expressed it to you today, and it's a very proper idea on their part, to realize the best and the most from the timber on those claims, and to administer them for the benefit of the public, and I'm certainly going to pay them tribute that they do, within my experience. But at the same time even as good a Government bureau as the Forest Service, and I hold there's none better, can be very arbitrary, can be very dictatorial, can be very cruel and unjust in some of its acts of administration. Those are individual cases again which are not general but they can be done, and if you separate the timber upon a claim from the claim itself, and the uses that are necessary for the development of that claim, and again I say you can't tell how much timber you're going to need. Of course, I'm free to say many of our larger mining operators are not very much concerned about this. They think they can buy the timbers that are necessary for their mine and have them transported to the mine perhaps as cheaply as they could if they had this timber upon their own claims, had it cut and sawed and so on; they'd have to maintain another operation than their mining, but the little fellow, the prospector, the man who locates a claim on 20 acres with some timber on it, remember, he's putting his whole life into the development of that claim, he's putting every hope and dream he ever had into the development of that mining claim; is he going to say "I'll take half of this," "I'll take a quarter of it," "I'll take whatever the Forest Service is willing to let me have, or the Bureau of Land Management thinks I ought to have, or do I want all of what is here for the possible needs of the great bonanza I expect to develop?" One of the incentives for locating a mining claim is that he will be able to have enough timber on that claim to furnish the props, the supports, the timbers underground, and even for the buildings that will be necessary, and so it's not unreasonable at all. If you locate any other kind of a surface right in the United States under our laws you're going to get it all. The miner asks for no more.

Now then, as I say, there have been individual abuses, and I'm not here to apologize for any of them. I'm not here to excuse any of them. I'm not here to say that anybody should locate a claim for a purpose, a mining claim for a purpose other than mining. I don't believe he should. I think you're right, absolutely right about that. We'll do anything we can to help you bring that about, but we want it to be done under some orderly process of law and not at somebody's whim or caprice.

Now, I came here today expecting perhaps that we'd hear something more about some of the things that we discussed at Wallace and these other meetings Mr. Goldy has told you about, and that is this matter

of location of geophysical claims. You know the old prospector going out in the hills with his burro, or even with his jeep, which they do nowadays, to locate a lead and a lode and start driving a tunnel, has just about passed out of the picture. He's gone. The young fellows that grow up nowadays don't care much for that kind of life. They're willing to go out in a jeep and do some surveying and all that sort of thing up in the hills for some of these larger companies if they're on the pay roll and are able to have part of their university tuition and board paid for the next winter, for that they're quite willing to do that, but the fellow that goes out in the hills today, especially in a district which has been developed as the Coeur d'Alene district has been, seeking for the location of a mining claim, staking it out, going through all the hardships that are necessary toward its development, trying to raise some money under the present laws that Congressman White has helped to pass for the SEC, or maybe he hasn't, I don't know, I haven't asked him

Congressman WHITE. Better check my vote.

Mr. CALLAHAN. I don't believe you did that, Congressman; but, as I say, they don't care to do that, and so we have this matter of hidden veins, of deep development, going way down, like one operation in our district is going down 3,000 feet before it even starts to explore from one side to the other, drive any crosscuts or any drifts. That's a matter that's going to require in the future some kind of legislation that will permit the location of claims that are larger than these 20-acre claims, much larger, that will permit them to be held for a certain period during which this geophysical or geological examination is taking place. That's one thing for which perhaps there is some amendment necessary, and I think Mr. Goldy and the Bureau of Land Management agree is absolutely essential to the discovery of new bodies of ore in the future of this great land of ours, discoveries that are absolutely essential.

We have had an entirely friendly, honest discussion from various groups here as to what they consider weaknesses in our present mining law. Now I hope we can get together on those. I hope that we can have a discussion tomorrow and, at some time or other throughout the country, a friendly open discussion of some of these things, certain changes that should be made. One of them that I spoke for this morning and that I'm entirely in favor of is that we do away finally and for all time with this matter of moratoria under which many of these abuses have grown up, except in cases of great emergency. I cannot see that that is any help to the mining industry, and it certainly is a detriment as far as the discovery of minerals is concerned, in my judgment.

I hope that we can discuss this question of surface, division of the ownership of the surface, but I'm going to put this thought in your mind; I want you to think about this: In 1872 the present mining law was passed, and that defined the limits of a mining claim, defined the work that should be done upon it to hold a mining claim year by year, defined what is necessary to secure a patent to that mining claim. That's a long time ago, and a good deal of water has gone under the bridge since then, and tremendous amounts of metals have been discovered and placed to the use of men that never would have been discovered had it not been for the beneficial mining laws of the United

(Ross Hall photo, Sandpoint, Idaho)

FIGURE 6.-Inventorying Uncle Sam's mineral resources.

U. S. Bureau of Mines

diamond drill operation making deep vein exploration in north Idaho.